Schools Consensus

#5. THE HAWAII STATE LWV WANTS TOOLS TO BE PROVIDED WHICH ASSURE PUBLIC INPUT AT THE LOCAL LEVEL IN EDUCATIONAL POLICY SETTING.

We had spontaneous consensus! Even though the question wasn't officially asked, the most consistent theme throughout reports from the leagues was the need to encourage and facilitate meaningful citizen input at the local level, not only through closer contact with Board of Education members and Advisory Councils on a continuing basis, but also in the early stages of budget development when Districts are setting their priorities.

#6. WE SUPPORT THE STATE GENERAL FUND 'AS THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR THE STATEWIDE K-12 SCHOOL SYSTEM.

Leagues felt State funding provides a broader, more equitable and dependable base for school financing than would result in local district taxes. There was concern expressed however, that this centralized method creates a lack of local influence.

#7. WE OPPOSE GIVING THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION THE POWER TO TAX.

#8. WE SUPPORT THE GOAL OF EQUAL FINANCING AND EQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR EACH CHILD, THEREFORE WE OPPOSE GIVING LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS THE AUTHORITY TO RAISE SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS.

#9. WE SUPPORT A BUDGET-MAKING PROCESS THAT PROVIDES FOR INPUT BY CITIZEN AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, BY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCA- TION STAFF AND BY LEGISLATORS.

Note that this wording supersedes "We support the present budget-making process as basically good". Please correct your Legislative Log, Jan. 1972 accordingly. While League members expressed general support for the method in which educational priorities are presently assembled for budget-making the expressed concern that the process:

assures meaningful citizen input at the local level in the early stages of budget development.

provides a device for thoughtful, realistic priority setting by the Board of Education and the Department of Education staff.

includes the legislative review implicit in our centralized State funding processes. League members recognized however, that this legislative review as presently structured is costly in both time and money. Apparent inefficiency in scheduling hearings results in Department staff people waiting many hours, sometimes days, in

#10). TOOLS SHOULD BE PROVIDED WITHIN THE FINANCIAL STRUCTURE TO ASSURE THAT THE CAPITAL AND OPERATING BUDGETS FOR EDUCATION, ONCE ADOPTED, WILL BE FOLLOWED CLOSELY.

League members, in evaluating budget implementation, expressed the view that:

after steps a-b-c above (#9) have resulted in a budget for education being adopted, it should be followed closely.

priorities established in the budget should not be unduly altered.

c. that in release of funds for education, the Governor should not attempt to change the adopted priorities. While we recognize there may be years when. the State' financial picture changes between budget adoption and implementation, thus requiring restricted spending, we believe spending decisions
should be made
within the framework of the originally established budget priorities.